2/8/18: Matt Fuhrmann

Location:

Workshop:

On February 8, Matt Fuhrmann will be joining us to present a paper entitled, "The Logic of Latent Nuclear Deterrence." The abstract appears below and the paper is attached.

Abstract: Nuclear deterrence is central to international relations theory and practice. Most people assume that countries must possess nuclear weapons in order to reap deterrence benefits from their nuclear programs. This article shows, however, that latent nuclear powers – nonnuclear states that possess the capacity to make weapons – can deter aggression, despite their lack of assembled warheads. Latent nuclear deterrence works because states that possess the technology needed to produce bombs can threaten to initiate or accelerate nuclear weapons programs if they are attacked. A fixed effects regression analysis that includes 170 countries from 1946 to 2010, using data compiled by the author on the global spread of sensitive nuclear technology, provides evidence consistent with three of the theory’s testable predictions. First, switching from non-latency to latency reduces the probability of being targeted in a violent military dispute in a given year by 3.32 percentage points. Second, having nuclear latency does not deter less serious, nonviolent disputes. Third, the development of non-sensitive nuclear technology that does not provide states with latent nuclear capacity is not associated with a lower likelihood of being attacked. A qualitative analysis of Iran’s nuclear activities from 2002 to 2015 illustrate these statistical findings. This evidence has lessons for the debate about nuclear disarmament: most scholars and policymakers are skeptical that the prospect of nuclear rearmament in a disarmed world could deter serious international disputes, but the case for latent nuclear deterrence is stronger than critics would lead us to believe.

2/8/18: Matt Fuhrmann

Location:

Workshop:

On February 8, Matt Fuhrmann will be joining us to present a paper entitled, "The Logic of Latent Nuclear Deterrence." The abstract appears below and the paper is attached.

Abstract: Nuclear deterrence is central to international relations theory and practice. Most people assume that countries must possess nuclear weapons in order to reap deterrence benefits from their nuclear programs. This article shows, however, that latent nuclear powers – nonnuclear states that possess the capacity to make weapons – can deter aggression, despite their lack of assembled warheads. Latent nuclear deterrence works because states that possess the technology needed to produce bombs can threaten to initiate or accelerate nuclear weapons programs if they are attacked. A fixed effects regression analysis that includes 170 countries from 1946 to 2010, using data compiled by the author on the global spread of sensitive nuclear technology, provides evidence consistent with three of the theory’s testable predictions. First, switching from non-latency to latency reduces the probability of being targeted in a violent military dispute in a given year by 3.32 percentage points. Second, having nuclear latency does not deter less serious, nonviolent disputes. Third, the development of non-sensitive nuclear technology that does not provide states with latent nuclear capacity is not associated with a lower likelihood of being attacked. A qualitative analysis of Iran’s nuclear activities from 2002 to 2015 illustrate these statistical findings. This evidence has lessons for the debate about nuclear disarmament: most scholars and policymakers are skeptical that the prospect of nuclear rearmament in a disarmed world could deter serious international disputes, but the case for latent nuclear deterrence is stronger than critics would lead us to believe.

Just Societies Speaker Series: The Politics of Minority Youth in the United States 1 of 3

Location:

It gives me great pleasure to announce the Just Societies Speaker Series, a new initiative I am launching this semester in my role as Dean of the Division of Social Science.

As social scientists, our research provides context, insight, and a deeper understanding of societies in the United States and abroad. My vision for this series is to spotlight the work of peers, here at Columbia and from institutions around the world, who are working in a range of important areas, specifically wealth inequality, criminal justice, immigration, LGBTQ rights, and climate change.

Each semester, my office will host a distinguished set of scholars, all of whom are experts in their respective fields. I am thrilled to inaugurate this series in three week's time with a talk from Cathy Cohen, the David and Mary Winton Green Professor of Political Science at The University of Chicago, who will be presenting on the politics of minority youth in the United States.

Included below is a link to RSVP for all three of the Spring 2018 lectures, featuring sociologistAlejandro Portes of Princeton University and our own Eric Foner. I encourage you to forward the details for the series on to your undergraduate and graduate students. All of these events are free and all are welcome to attend.

Cathy CohenDavid & Mary Winton Green Professor of Political Science,The University of ChicagoThe Politics of Minority Youth in the United StatesFebruary 15, 2018, 4:00pm-5:30pmThe World Room, Columbia Journalism

Abstract

The summer of 2014 is often remembered as a critical moment when rising numbers of children appeared at the Mexico-US border seeking asylum, but in recent years, other turning points related to child migration have also occurred. In 2012, Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) was implemented to offer temporary status to migrants who entered with their parents without legal documents. And since 2008, rising deportations have led to growing numbers of US born children without one or both of their parents. These three groups of children fall in-between two polarized worlds related to crackdown or compassion. One views minor migrant children as criminals and dangerous, the other sees them in need of compassion and assistance. In this talk, I present preliminary findings from a new project designed to shift away from polarized narratives and build a middle ground about migrant children. I begin by describing the history of government policies and practices related to child migrant resettlement and illustrate how shifts in policies and practices have helped set the foundation for today’s polarized narratives. I also describe the different groups of child migrants, how the US manages each, and what we know about their social and economic integration. Finally, I propose several child-centered initiatives that may shift the contemporary narratives by integrating both compassion and security.

Bio

Katharine M. Donato is the Donald G. Herzberg Professor of International Migration and Director of the Institute for the Study of International Migration in the Edmund A. Walsh School of Foreign Service at Georgetown University. Her work examines many research questions related to migration, including the economic consequences of U.S. immigration policy; health effects of Mexico-U.S. migration; immigrant parent involvement in schools; deportation and its effects for immigrants; the great recession and its consequences for Mexican workers; and globalization and unauthorized migration. Her most recent project examines how environmental stressors affect out-migration from communities in southwestern Bangladesh. In August 2016, her book, Gender and International Migration: From the Slavery Era to the Global Age, received Honorable Mention from the International Migration Section of the American Sociological Association (co-authored Donna Gabaccia). She has taught previously at Vanderbilt and Rice Universities.

Videoconference is available at: Columbia School of Social Work1255 Amsterdam Avenue, Room 1109

2/15/18: Peter Katzenstein

Location:

Workshop:

On February 16, Peter Katzenstein (Cornell) will be joining us to present a paper entitled, "Protean Power and Uncertainty: Exploring the Unexpected in World Politics." The abstract appears below and the paper is attached.

Abstract: This article introduces the concept of “protean power” as the basis for a better analysis of unanticipated events in world politics. Protean power is the effect of actors’ agility as they adapt in situations of uncertainty. This definition departs from conventional definitions of power, which focus on actors’ evolving ability to exercise control in situations of calculable risk and their consequent ability to cause outcomes these actors deem desirable. We argue that this conventional view is overly confining; inclusion of protean power in our analytical models helps us to better account for unexpected change in world politics. Notably, actors respond to shifts between risk and uncertainty, in both context and experience, with affirmation, refusal, improvisation, or innovation. In doing so, they create room for control and protean power as effects, rather than causes, of such practices. However, protean power should not replace control power. These two basic forms of power relate to one another, in a variety of ways, in complex contexts characterized by both risk and uncertainty.

Shaping the Future of DACA: Bridging Research and Policy

Location:

DACA, a five-year-old policy, has provided temporary protection to about 800,000 undocumented immigrants who entered the U.S. as “minors” from deportation and provide them with a work “permit.” The impending end of DACA raises many urgent questions about the impact and future of DACA, a debate that has occurred in a policy and national context that is often devoid of scientific evidence, despite the existence of rigorous and innovative research that shows that DACA has clearly benefited recipients of the program.

This conference will highlight the most recent research and advocacy work on DACA. The academic and policy panels will engage in a discussion the past, present and future of DACA and its impact on the immigrants and local communities across the country.

Background

In September 2017, President Trump announced an order to end Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA), slated to take effect in six months, while urging Congress to replace DACA with comprehensive immigration reform. DACA, a five-year-old policy, has provided temporary protection to about 800,000 undocumented immigrants who entered the U.S. as “minors” from deportation and provide them with a work “permit.” The impending end of DACA raises many urgent questions about the impact and future of DACA, a debate that has occurred in a policy and national context that is often devoid of scientific evidence, despite the existence of rigorous and innovative research that shows that DACA has clearly benefited recipients of the program.

This conference, organized to precede the immediate ending of DACA in March 2018, will bring together academics, policymakers and activists to engage in a discussion on the past, present and future of DACA and its impacts on the immigrant and local communities across the country.

Agenda

12:45-2:00 p.m.: Multidisciplinary Perspectives on DACAMae Ngai (Lung Family Professor of Asian American Studies and Professor of History, Columbia University) DACA and Legalization in Historical Perspective Elizabeth Vaquera (Associate Professor of Sociology, George Washington University) Personal and Cultural Trauma: The Social and Emotional Wellbeing of Undocumented Young Immigrants and their Families Chris Zepeda-Millan (Assistant Professor of Ethnic Studies, University of California, Berkeley)DACA and Immigrant Rights Activism Under Trump

2:15-3:30 p.m.: Economic, Political and Social Impact of DACAFrancesc Ortega (Dina Axelrad Perry Associate Professor of Economics, Queens College of CUNY)The Economic Effects of Providing Legal Status to DREAMersCaitlin Patler (Assistant Professor of Sociology, University of California, Davis)Immigration Status and Psychological Wellbeing: A Representative Study of the Impacts of DACA in California, 2012-2016Tom K. Wong (Associate Professor of Political Science, University of California, San Diego) Title TBA

3:45-5:15 p.m.: Policy Perspectives on the Future of DACAJanet Calvo (Professor of Law, CUNY School of Law)State Policies Promoting DACA Recipients’ Access to Healthcare, Education and Professional LicensingCristina Jimenez (Executive Director and Co-Founder, United We Dream)Title TBAAnu Joshi (Director of Immigration Policy, New York Immigration Coalition)What Do Family Unification, Diversity Visas and Border Security Have To Do With DACA? Not Much and, Unfortunately, EverythingDonald M. Kerwin Jr., (Executive Director of Center for Migration Studies)TBA

2/22/18: Sarah Brooks

Location:

Workshop:

On February 22, Sarah Brooks will be presenting a paper entitled, "Oil and Development: Technology, Geology, and the ‘Curse’ of Natural Resources." The abstract appears below and the paper is attached.

Abstract: In this paper we build upon our earlier research (Brooks and Kurtz 2016) to challenge the conventional wisdom about the putative ‘curse’ of natural resources. In doing so, we make a potentially controversial claim: that not all “oil wealth” is a curse. Rather, we argue that it is only the “easy to get” oil that can be associated with the pernicious developmental outcomes, while “hard to get” oil, such as that extracted through higher technologically-intensive methods, is not a curse for political development. Our empirical analysis employs a novel approach, by starting with the characteristics of more than 7,000 oil fields around the world to understand the technological intensity, and hence ‘rent’ possibilities for each field. We aggregate these data by country and find that indeed the oil that is extracted through highly capital-intensive processes has a positive, rather than detrimental, effect on democratic development. In making the argument, we emphasize the importance of domestic technological development, human capital, and the interdependence of regime types.